Are reservations transferable?

I have not yet had an opportunity to fully process the recently-released pricing and option details for the Model S. I am disappointed with the revised specifications that show decreased performance for any battery pack smaller than 85KWh. To that point, I find it amusing that the materials still refer to a "5.6 second 0-60," but that is now quite arbitrarily referring to the 85KWh non-performance model specifically. Taken as a blank slate where we stand today, if you're going to quote the performance of the best model as a blanket specification for the line-up, you might as well say the 0-60 time is 4.4 seconds.

For those of you already planning on a 300-mile vehicle who are left scratching your heads over the modest outpouring of frustration among 160-milers, consider how you would feel had the tables been turned. Say, for the sake of argument, Tesla had said, "Well, you get 5.6 seconds with the 160 mile version, but all of the additional batteries we used in the 300-mile version add weight and that one does 6.5 seconds." You'd be saying, "Hey wait a second, you guys said 5.6!" I know the engineers here were anticipating the real outcome, but any defense the 300-milers provide is at least partially tainted by their knowledge that their particular vehicle choice was not affected by the announcement.

I'm also disappointed by the $3,750 nobody-will-ever-delete-this package. Oh, you want your mid-segment luxury sedan to have halogen headlights, no navigation, and no keyless entry? Well, I guess you can delete the technology package. That's the sort of package that, if this were a Toyota, would be absent in no more than zero vehicles in actual dealer inventories.

The other options are sensible and come as no surprise. Nicer wheels, nicer interior materials, deluxe paint, sunroof options, etc.

I had vowed to never buy another car with an internal combustion engine because ICE is outdated and boring technology. So I have two reservations and had been planning to purchase two 160-mile vehicles, one each for my wife and myself. We live in Los Angeles and 99.5% of our driving would easily fit very conservatively into that range. Our daily usage would average below 25 miles for each vehicle.

So I am pondering my options.

I accept the reality and roll with it. Upside: I enjoy two nice vehicles. Downside: I feel a little burned and disappointed. This may taint my overall enjoyment of the experience of having two Teslas.

I refund one reservation and go with only one 160-mile vehicle to "test the water" and see what happens in another couple years. Upside: This is a safe option and potentially has a nice future upside of enjoying whatever innovations a mid-cycle refresh has in store. Maybe they will eventually use batteries of the same efficiency as the 85KWh in the 40KWh model, which presumably would decrease its weight and perhaps improve performance. Downside: I need to retain an ICE vehicle. Argh!

I refund one reservation and use my remaining reservation for a model with a 300-mile range, perhaps even the performance model. Upside: Performance, woohoo! Downside: What a waste having so much unnecessary battery capacity. And of money, frankly. But luxuries are what they are.

With either of the later two options, I am left wondering if it's possible to transfer reservations. I read the brief 1-pager Tesla had us sign and it doesn't say anything about transfers. If it were possible, I would consider the option of selling my ~1700 position in the general production queue.

If not transferable, I am also beginning to wonder what sort of initial resale market the Model S would enjoy. Are any other 160-milers considering this? Consider the possibility that those of us with relatively low reservation numbers are well-situated to satiate the demand of someone who has not yet reserved but cannot resist the latest trendy toys. Living in Los Angeles as I do, I am surrounded by this kind of person. Who knows, but it's something to think about if you have a reservation and are debating exiting the queue.

I don't have an answer, but yes, I concede your point that I'd be miffed if the 300 pack got lower performance because of weight. Mainly because it's a "logical" thing that I couldn't necessarily argue against and just had to swallow.

On your decision though, I might settle in the middle with the 230 pack.

I don't believe they are transferable. That's a tough decision. Would the 60kWh car with tech package work better? The difference between the 5.6 and 5.9 seconds would feel minimal (similar to the Roadster vs. Roadster sport). You could always take delivery, make sure you're happy then place an order for the 40 kWh pack car down the road in a year or two. That way you'd have one car to take longer trips with at least. I agree the tech package should have been standard (at least nav). Anyway, good luck with your decision.

Assuming reservations are not transferrable, the remaining option is to work a deal with someone in which your order the car they want, and then sell it to them. The problem with this arrangement is that you have to pay the sales tax, and then the person buying from you also has to pay tax. And, neither of you get the Fed Tax Credit (IRS says you can't have acquired the car for resale purposes). So, now the new purchaser has to pay full price plus sales tax with no $7500 rebate, has to pay his own transfer tax, and has to pay you for your trouble. That's going to be a might steep premium.

Cheaper now for him to jump on the Signature bandwagon. I hear there are a few openings due to cancellations. ;^)

Without the tech package, you actually have Google navigation and keyless opening like in the Roadster. Press a button on the FOB.
From all the options bundled in the tech package, I have no desire except the Xenon lights but not enough to shell out $3750 + VAT for it.

IIRC the reservation agreement excludes transferability.

With a P-1700 spot I doubt the 40kWh package will be selectable when it's your turn to order. You possibly have to exercise your one-time deferral option granted in the reservation agreement. Alternatively you can go with the 230 mile pack, at least for one of your orders.

For those of you already planning on a 300-mile vehicle who are left scratching your heads over the modest outpouring of frustration among 160-milers, consider how you would feel had the tables been turned. Say, for the sake of argument, Tesla had said, "Well, you get 5.6 seconds with the 160 mile version, but all of the additional batteries we used in the 300-mile version add weight and that one does 6.5 seconds." You'd be saying, "Hey wait a second, you guys said 5.6!" I know the engineers here were anticipating the real outcome, but any defense the 300-milers provide is at least partially tainted by their knowledge that their particular vehicle choice was not affected by the announcement.

Click to expand...

First of all, that was very well said and something I've felt since the pricing announcement. It's easy for those that were not planning on getting the 40 kWh option to view those of us that were as whining because we express some disappointment with the lack of communication of the 0-60 times and the lack of Supercharge. howabout2 is right that if the tables were turned, these same 85 kWh reservation holders that defend Tesla to no end would instead be crying foul.

As for the $3750 tech package. I do agree that a lot of the items in the package (xenon headlamps, keyless entry, etc.) may be virtually standard on many modern vehicles. However, the sum of all the parts of the package I believe are worth the cost. I'm more than OK with that package and price. And they could have easily included all of these features standard and simply set the base model at $53650, but that wouldn't do them much good (nor would it benefit you in anyway over separating it). They really wanted to hit that magical sub $50k price target. That's a big marketing tool that they can use to grab headlines and stir up more interest. I mean, they even charge $750 for choosing a non-black or white paint color.

With a P-1700 spot I doubt the 40kWh package will be selectable when it's your turn to order. You possibly have to exercise your one-time deferral option granted in the reservation agreement. Alternatively you can go with the 230 mile pack, at least for one of your orders.

Click to expand...

Can you expand on this? Not sure what you mean by it not being selectable or the one-time deferral option. Being a ~P-2000 reservation holder myself, and one opting for the 40 kWh option, I'm curious.

Can you expand on this? Not sure what you mean by it not being selectable or the one-time deferral option. Being a ~P-2000 reservation holder myself, and one opting for the 40 kWh option, I'm curious.

Click to expand...

VolkerP is speculating that since the 40kWh battery version is being produced after the 85 & 60 versions, when they get to P-1700 they won't yet be at 40kWh battery production, so you'll be forced to use your one-time deferral to order your car.

Tesla hasn't said anything about being forced to use that deferral, only that they won't be producing 60 kWh versions until fall, and 40kWh versions until winter.

Considering past angst, we should be careful about what we assume Tesla will do.

However, I would expect that they would not force you to use a deferral, but that if you spec your car such that they're not ready to make it yet, they would "skip over" you and go to the next person in line. Once they do start producing that version, they would go to the beginning of the remaining queue (people who didn't get cars) and start working down it again.

For those of you already planning on a 300-mile vehicle who are left scratching your heads over the modest outpouring of frustration among 160-milers, consider how you would feel had the tables been turned. Say, for the sake of argument, Tesla had said, "Well, you get 5.6 seconds with the 160 mile version, but all of the additional batteries we used in the 300-mile version add weight and that one does 6.5 seconds." You'd be saying, "Hey wait a second, you guys said 5.6!" I know the engineers here were anticipating the real outcome, but any defense the 300-milers provide is at least partially tainted by their knowledge that their particular vehicle choice was not affected by the announcement.

Click to expand...

If the tables were turned and the 85kWh pack had the slowest acceleration, I wouldn't be disappointed at all, I'd just set my sights on the 40kwH pack instead.

VolkerP is speculating that since the 40kWh battery version is being produced after the 85 & 60 versions, when they get to P-1700 they won't yet be at 40kWh battery production, so you'll be forced to use your one-time deferral to order your car.

Click to expand...

This would be a huge mistake, PR and potentially legal, on Tesla's part. There's a big difference between warning "ok, you can configure the 40 kWh when your number is up, but it will take longer until you actually get it" and bullying "you'll have to use your deferral then."

Assuming reservations are not transferrable, the remaining option is to work a deal with someone in which your order the car they want, and then sell it to them. The problem with this arrangement is that you have to pay the sales tax, and then the person buying from you also has to pay tax. And, neither of you get the Fed Tax Credit (IRS says you can't have acquired the car for resale purposes). So, now the new purchaser has to pay full price plus sales tax with no $7500 rebate, has to pay his own transfer tax, and has to pay you for your trouble. That's going to be a might steep premium.

Cheaper now for him to jump on the Signature bandwagon. I hear there are a few openings due to cancellations. ;^)

Click to expand...

I think that analysis essentially puts the subject to rest. Thanks to everyone for your thoughts! It's a shame that the tax credit presents a problem for any immediate resale.

With this, for the time being, I will take the safe option of keeping my plans unchanged until I am required to lock in a decision with Tesla. No sense in refunding a deposit until it's absolutely the last moment to do so.

Who knows, perhaps there will be some good news for the 160-milers out there. Speaking of which, if you would indulge me this opportunity to plead with Tesla directly...

Do you hear me, Tesla? How about some good news for a change for the 160-mile crowd? The people playing at your "entry-level" ache for some good news.

You tell us we're the last in line; you've got to move the higher-capacity units first. Okay, we'll suck it up and wait our turn. Then we hear that you're unlikely to offer leases. Again, very well; that's disappointing for some, but we'll live with it.

Yes, I know even the entry-level Model S is, in fact, a Model S and is therefore quite a marvel of engineering. Believe me, I realize that and I still am excited to be part of the wider Tesla community.

But don't miss an opportunity to redefine precisely what entry-level means. I see no compelling reason to associate battery capacity with feature content except to honor the traditions established by the legacy auto manufacturers that came before you. You could instead witness generations of needlessly locking desirable options to high-margin engine upgrades shattered by the unconventional thinking of treating range as just another option category. In my ideal world, Tesla would be working to bring me a high-performance low-range model. Do I want high-performance? Yes and I will pay a premium for it. Do I want a 300 mile range? No, not really.

If the tables were turned and the 85kWh pack had the slowest acceleration, I wouldn't be disappointed at all, I'd just set my sights on the 40kwH pack instead.

Click to expand...

That's interesting. Not that I don't trust you, but that begs the question: why were you interested in the 300-mile pack to begin with? You would quickly dismiss it had the tables been turned and the 40KWh pack were the high-performance pack. So it seems that, as with my driving needs, range is not an issue for you.

(Perhaps your financial situation is such that the cost differential for the higher range was never a concern and you might as well then opt for 85KWh just to be "safe." But that would put you in a very small minority, I think.)

I'm going to point something out here that I've noticed in a lot of threads only because this is still a small thread. The keyless entry as far as we know is included in the base Model S. What is not included is AUTOMATIC keyless entry, which is where you walk up to the car and just have to open the door, no pressing of any button. My Ford Focus from 2001 has keyless entry. The Models S base has keyless entry. The tech package gives you the benefit of not having to touch the key fob at all to open the door. By saying that keyless entry is only included in the tech package is wrong and that point keeps getting incorrectly re-iterated on this forum.

Thanks for the correction, shark2k. I had not realized the distinction.

Tesla could probably do with a few more details on the Features and Options/Pricing pages to clarify what exactly the various trim levels have in terms of commonplace functions. Quickly reviewing those two pages right now, it's still not clear to me how you know what you've written above (not that I doubt it).

Thanks for the correction, shark2k. I had not realized the distinction.

Tesla could probably do with a few more details on the Features and Options/Pricing pages to clarify what exactly the various trim levels have in terms of commonplace functions. Quickly reviewing those two pages right now, it's still not clear to me how you know what you've written above (not that I doubt it).

Click to expand...

I have not gotten anything officially from Tesla, but I did read in one of the threads in the Model S sub-forum that they either e-mailed Tesla or talked to a rep that said the same thing. But, what I went on was common sense in this scenario. Like I said, my 2001 Ford Focus has keyless entry. Elon Musk was talking about having the handles automatically pop-out as you appeared, not having to take the key fob out of your pocket. Automatic means that you don't do anything, it just happens. Keyless entry means you need to do something (press a buton) but do not have to put a key in the door in order to open it. If I find the post where the person mentioned someone from Tesla saying basically the same thing I'll post a link.

When I initially became interested in the model S I was thinking of getting the smallest battery. It would be good for 95+% of my driving easily. There are several trips I take throughout the year that I couldn't with the 40kWh battery, so I began to think of higher capacities so I could drive my Tesla everywhere. And then Elon dropped the bomb about the performance version. The thing is, I closely considered a roadster for a long time, but it would only be good for 50% of my driving since it only has 2 seats. I liked the idea of an electric super-car, and felt i was giving up something with the Model S. I don't feel that way anymore.

That's interesting. Not that I don't trust you, but that begs the question: why were you interested in the 300-mile pack to begin with? You would quickly dismiss it had the tables been turned and the 40KWh pack were the high-performance pack. So it seems that, as with my driving needs, range is not an issue for you.

(Perhaps your financial situation is such that the cost differential for the higher range was never a concern and you might as well then opt for 85KWh just to be "safe." But that would put you in a very small minority, I think.)